<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (7) TMI 271 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755051</link>
    <description>Admission under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code turns on whether debt and default are established on the evidence. The materials here, including the loan agreement, unsecured demand promissory note, audited balance-sheet disclosure, and information-utility default record, collectively proved borrowing, liability, and default. The argument that the loan was only a business loan was inconsistent with the documents. The stamping objection to the promissory note did not displace the substantive proof of debt and default, and was treated as insufficient to bar admission where liability and default were otherwise established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2024 08:20:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=758977" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 271 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755051</link>
      <description>Admission under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code turns on whether debt and default are established on the evidence. The materials here, including the loan agreement, unsecured demand promissory note, audited balance-sheet disclosure, and information-utility default record, collectively proved borrowing, liability, and default. The argument that the loan was only a business loan was inconsistent with the documents. The stamping objection to the promissory note did not displace the substantive proof of debt and default, and was treated as insufficient to bar admission where liability and default were otherwise established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755051</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>